Which (if any) 3-yr-olds will run next year?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Getaway

What most of you still can't get into your heads is that it costs TONS of money to insure these beasts! Street Sense is worth MILLIONS and for smaller operations (not Coolmore or Darley or Shadwell....) it is just not economically feasible to keep them in training. While Im sure the connections of Street Sense are not starving for money, they have much more to lose by keeping him in training another year. They are not in any way cashing in...they have had a good run, and are getting out while they are ahead. Bernardini on the other hand last year was a whole different story. I just can't look at Street Sense the same way.

yes they are.

street sense has no hope of making the millions in stud fees as a racehorse running for purses. tafel is no dummy, but he most certainly is cashing in.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yes they are.

street sense has no hope of making the millions in stud fees as a racehorse running for purses. tafel is no dummy, but he most certainly is cashing in.

Exactly. It's about the money. And there's no law that people have to (or even get to) maximize their money at the expense of the sport.

--Dunbar

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Hacker Craft will run next year

Since EC is gonna retire after this year...im thinking my next license plate is gonna be..

HKR CRFT

[tiznowthegreat]

Any update regarding Curlin or AGS for next year?

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yes they are.

street sense has no hope of making the millions in stud fees as a racehorse running for purses. tafel is no dummy, but he most certainly is cashing in.

I was thinking about the breeding industry, as I was reading yet another article about George Washington today- one of the articles mentioned he was sold for a bit over $2 million as a yearling. It reminded me of how incredibly over-inflated the prices for racehorses are, because they're being sold not as racing prospects, but as breeding prospects, which happen to run a few times in an attempt to increase their value. GW, one of the few really expensive racehorses who actually had a chance to earn back what he cost, was retired upon having earned a little more than half what he cost, because he wasn't really purchased for that at all- it was for profits in breeding.

And because of the breeding industry, the successful intact horses are assigned these incredibly high values for insurance purposes, and yes, it does start to make no sense to run them because they can't earn enough to cover the insurance payments for an arbitrary figure set according to a possible future breeding success (which is about as rare as success in stakes races- Real Quiet sired a BC winner yesterday and stands for what, $5000? In Pennsylvania). And it has nothing to do with racing as a sport- it's this weird parallel industry that makes lots of money and doesn't really have anything to do with the reason racing exists (gambling)- a 6-1 shot pays exactly the same in a $2500 claimer as in the Kentucky Derby. But it does harm the popular face of the industry because it's hard to attract fans to a sport where the big stars have maybe an 18-month career.

And because of the big $$ involved, the racing industry won't do the most obvious thing to keep the stars running- regulate the breeding industry. Requiring the stud horse to be at least 5 years old is no less arbitrary than requiring the matings to be natural covers. But requiring natural covers drives up stud fees, while making horses reach 5 before breeding would result in a lot of precocious but unsound 2-year-olds being forgotten after they get injured and retired to replicate their unsoundness.

Anyway, so yeah, it's about the $$. And so I can sympathize with Dunbar finding it hard to root for a horse that is being rushed off to the breeding shed. As a person who understands $$ rules everything in this world, I comprehend it, but as a fan of racing I hate it, and in the end, fandom is emotional, not logical (see some of my 2006 posts on Lawyer Ron for proof of that!).

[GPK]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

I was thinking about the breeding industry, as I was reading yet another article about George Washington today- one of the articles mentioned he was sold for a bit over $2 million as a yearling. It reminded me of how incredibly over-inflated the prices for racehorses are, because they're being sold not as racing prospects, but as breeding prospects, which happen to run a few times in an attempt to increase their value. GW, one of the few really expensive racehorses who actually had a chance to earn back what he cost, was retired upon having earned a little more than half what he cost, because he wasn't really purchased for that at all- it was for profits in breeding.

And because of the breeding industry, the successful intact horses are assigned these incredibly high values for insurance purposes, and yes, it does start to make no sense to run them because they can't earn enough to cover the insurance payments for an arbitrary figure set according to a possible future breeding success (which is about as rare as success in stakes races- Real Quiet sired a BC winner yesterday and stands for what, $5000? In Pennsylvania). And it has nothing to do with racing as a sport- it's this weird parallel industry that makes lots of money and doesn't really have anything to do with the reason racing exists (gambling)- a 6-1 shot pays exactly the same in a $2500 claimer as in the Kentucky Derby. But it does harm the popular face of the industry because it's hard to attract fans to a sport where the big stars have maybe an 18-month career.

And because of the big $$ involved, the racing industry won't do the most obvious thing to keep the stars running- regulate the breeding industry. Requiring the stud horse to be at least 5 years old is no less arbitrary than requiring the matings to be natural covers. But requiring natural covers drives up stud fees, while making horses reach 5 before breeding would result in a lot of precocious but unsound 2-year-olds being forgotten after they get injured and retired to replicate their unsoundness.

Anyway, so yeah, it's about the $$. And so I can sympathize with Dunbar finding it hard to root for a horse that is being rushed off to the breeding shed. As a person who understands $$ rules everything in this world, I comprehend it, but as a fan of racing I hate it, and in the end, fandom is emotional, not logical (see some of my 2006 posts on Lawyer Ron for proof of that!).

your so sexy when you talk like that...

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

I was thinking about the breeding industry, as I was reading yet another article about George Washington today- one of the articles mentioned he was sold for a bit over $2 million as a yearling. It reminded me of how incredibly over-inflated the prices for racehorses are, because they're being sold not as racing prospects, but as breeding prospects, which happen to run a few times in an attempt to increase their value. GW, one of the few really expensive racehorses who actually had a chance to earn back what he cost, was retired upon having earned a little more than half what he cost, because he wasn't really purchased for that at all- it was for profits in breeding.

And because of the breeding industry, the successful intact horses are assigned these incredibly high values for insurance purposes, and yes, it does start to make no sense to run them because they can't earn enough to cover the insurance payments for an arbitrary figure set according to a possible future breeding success (which is about as rare as success in stakes races- Real Quiet sired a BC winner yesterday and stands for what, $5000? In Pennsylvania). And it has nothing to do with racing as a sport- it's this weird parallel industry that makes lots of money and doesn't really have anything to do with the reason racing exists (gambling)- a 6-1 shot pays exactly the same in a $2500 claimer as in the Kentucky Derby. But it does harm the popular face of the industry because it's hard to attract fans to a sport where the big stars have maybe an 18-month career.

And because of the big $$ involved, the racing industry won't do the most obvious thing to keep the stars running- regulate the breeding industry. Requiring the stud horse to be at least 5 years old is no less arbitrary than requiring the matings to be natural covers. But requiring natural covers drives up stud fees, while making horses reach 5 before breeding would result in a lot of precocious but unsound 2-year-olds being forgotten after they get injured and retired to replicate their unsoundness.

Anyway, so yeah, it's about the $$. And so I can sympathize with Dunbar finding it hard to root for a horse that is being rushed off to the breeding shed. As a person who understands $$ rules everything in this world, I comprehend it, but as a fan of racing I hate it, and in the end, fandom is emotional, not logical (see some of my 2006 posts on Lawyer Ron for proof of that!).

Good post but personally I believe limiting a stallions foal crop to a certain number would be a better option than making a stallion wait until they are 5. You may wind up with horses with legit injuries trying a limited, big money campaign with endings like GW. It would also lower the total value of a stallion because they would not be able to collect as much in stud fees which may lead to lesser horses who may stand for 15k or less stay in training to try to enhance credentials since they have the potential to make close to the breeding money on the track. Of course these things have no chance of ever happening.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

And because of the big $$ involved, the racing industry won't do the most obvious thing to keep the stars running- regulate the breeding industry. Requiring the stud horse to be at least 5 years old is no less arbitrary than requiring the matings to be natural covers. But requiring natural covers drives up stud fees, while making horses reach 5 before breeding would result in a lot of precocious but unsound 2-year-olds being forgotten after they get injured and retired to replicate their unsoundness.

Wow! I've never heard anyone express that idea besides me. Thank you!

As you note, it's entirely possible for the breeding industry to be regulated in the interest of the overall horseracing business. Breeders would take a minor hit. They would lose one year out of a horse's, what, 12-17 year breeding life? As compensation for that, we'd see horses that become stars, like Street Sense, hang around another year. We might have seen Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex run another year.

In every other sport, the stars try to hang around as long as they can. That helps create fans. People relate to familiar names. In horseracing, as soon as a horse's name cracks the general public's radar, that horse is gone from the scene.

As it is now run, I see the breeding business as a giant pyramid scheme. Breeding costs are very high, despite the fact that few offspring will amount to much. As soon as any offspring shows promise, it, too, is whisked off to the shed to create another pyramid of its own. Because of the economics, breeders are breeding future breeders, not racehorses.

Maybe when there are 100 people/day coming to Santa Anita and Belmont, the industry will realize it has to take the step of prohibiting breeding with any stallion until it is at least 5 years old.

One of my two local papers did not have ANY coverage of the Breeder's Cup in today's paper. That's how large the BC is in the mind of some sports editors.

--Dunbar

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Wow! I've never heard anyone express that idea besides me. Thank you!

As you note, it's entirely possible for the breeding industry to be regulated in the interest of the overall horseracing business. Breeders would take a minor hit. They would lose one year out of a horse's, what, 12-17 year breeding life? As compensation for that, we'd see horses that become stars, like Street Sense, hang around another year. We might have seen Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex run another year.

In every other sport, the stars try to hang around as long as they can. That helps create fans. People relate to familiar names. In horseracing, as soon as a horse's name cracks the general public's radar, that horse is gone from the scene.

As it is now run, I see the breeding business as a giant pyramid scheme. Breeding costs are very high, despite the fact that few offspring will amount to much. As soon as any offspring shows promise, it, too, is whisked off to the shed to create another pyramid of its own. Because of the economics, breeders are breeding future breeders, not racehorses.

Maybe when there are 100 people/day coming to Santa Anita and Belmont, the industry will realize it has to take the step of prohibiting breeding with any stallion until it is at least 5 years old.

One of my two local papers did not have ANY coverage of the Breeder's Cup in today's paper. That's how large the BC is in the mind of some sports editors.

--Dunbar

While agree that it would be nice if horses raced longer the idea that the game will somehow be revived if a few of the big horses run at 3 is just not true.
1st problem - The greater the chance of a popular horse having an untimely ending which does far more to hurt the game than one staying in training and running does to help it. Making anything mandatory will always make people make questionable decisions especially when so much money is involved. The truth is that I am sure that you can get a much lower insurance rate if a horse is not in training and some may retire and sit the year out anyway. Or run in the Dubai race then retire.
2nd Problem - Racing fans are going to watch the big events regardless. New fans may not know who the hell is running anyway. Beside a few big days a year, it is not like the horses will run much anyway. Racings problem is that it needs new fans that bet, not just new fans.
3rd Problem - See recent campaigns of Funny Cide

[Danzig]

the breeding industry has got to self correct. read the other day in bh that altho keeneland sales were a 'success', only 1/4 of the breeders made back their money. obviously that can't continue. over the last few months, there have been some saying they are going to a lower priced stallion, as the prices aren't going thru the roof like in years past. and of course coolmore vs darley has some effect on that--for a few breeders. most of course never have the opportunity to have one of theirs get the attention of the biggest guns.
darley grabbed a few headlines due to their purchases of some of the top three year olds, but i think overall that the market is turning downward.

The problem is that I like watching horses run, not waiting for their offspring.
Each horse is an individual, not a descendant of some horse who won a Grade I race.

Therefore I hope Street Sense, as well as Smarty Jones, Bernardini, etc... are absolute duds in the shed. I hope all their offspring make great riding ponies and are happy doing so.

I like watching athletes perform. I really liked watching Street Sense ride the rail with Borel aboard. He made races interesting. He was fun to watch. I would look forward to races he was in.

But racing is not about people who like watching athletes compete.
Which is the purest form of sports pleasure, apologies to the serious
handicappers, breeders, pinhookers, hookers, etc...

[ALostTexan]

I will always root for the gelding in the Derby. If there has to be a TC Winner, I hope they are a gelding...

Originally Posted by merasmag

your logic is more convoluted than most but my little mind unraveled it to the point to say you haven't thought your somewhat smug conclusion to it's rightful end...i am paying street sense's bills, and others here a lot more than i...u might be watching kobe or whoever for free but who's paying 200 bucks a seat for those college games you're such an expert at? u are living on everyone else's dime unless u have a s-load of bc apparel in your closet

Those 200 dollar seats at college games are miniscule compared to what TV networks pay the NCAA to broadcast those games. Thus the advertisers are obviously making bucks off the consumer settin in her big chair at home drinking large amounts of the High Life. Get real magma.

And you very well might be paying more of Street Sense's bill. Which is why your computer speaks Japanese to you.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

While agree that it would be nice if horses raced longer the idea that the game will somehow be revived if a few of the big horses run at 3 is just not true.
1st problem - The greater the chance of a popular horse having an untimely ending which does far more to hurt the game than one staying in training and running does to help it. Making anything mandatory will always make people make questionable decisions especially when so much money is involved. The truth is that I am sure that you can get a much lower insurance rate if a horse is not in training and some may retire and sit the year out anyway. Or run in the Dubai race then retire.
2nd Problem - Racing fans are going to watch the big events regardless. New fans may not know who the hell is running anyway. Beside a few big days a year, it is not like the horses will run much anyway. Racings problem is that it needs new fans that bet, not just new fans.
3rd Problem - See recent campaigns of Funny Cide

I think the GW situation yesterday makes it even more difficult for in-demand 3YO potential studs to return to the track.

On that note... while I have no idea what defines a catastrophic injury, it happened right in front of us, and I don't know why they didn't make any effort to stabilize the foot and try to save him. It almost seems like Coolmore didn't WANT to save him... maybe I'm being pessimistic, who knows.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by philcski

I think the GW situation yesterday makes it even more difficult for in-demand 3YO potential studs to return to the track.

On that note... while I have no idea what defines a catastrophic injury, it happened right in front of us, and I don't know why they didn't make any effort to stabilize the foot and try to save him. It almost seems like Coolmore didn't WANT to save him... maybe I'm being pessimistic, who knows.

If what was said was true there is no chance of recovery...multiple fractures to sesamoids and conjular to cannon with open wound.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by philcski

I think the GW situation yesterday makes it even more difficult for in-demand 3YO potential studs to return to the track.

On that note... while I have no idea what defines a catastrophic injury, it happened right in front of us, and I don't know why they didn't make any effort to stabilize the foot and try to save him. It almost seems like Coolmore didn't WANT to save him... maybe I'm being pessimistic, who knows.

open wound means infection, don't forget that barbaro suffered from a massive infection, and he did not have an open wound when he broke down.
also, because of the dislocation, the blood supply was cut off. that is the worst thing that can happen, as there is no chance once the supply is gone.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Merlinsky

I think it's ridiculous not to root for Street Sense because he's going off to breed. Either he's good enough or he's not. If he is and this is your reasoning, it's pure spite which is crazy.

Regarding next year, I think they're thinking Dubai World Cup with Lawyer Ron and frankly I enjoy seeing him do what he's been doing. This isn't some sad attempt to eek out another race, he's G1 caliber and seems to thoroughly enjoy himself. They get the purse money (which let's face it, is why he's still going), we get to keep seeing him, and should he start to wind down before they choose to retire--which I doubt--the finish position contractually limits him from being driven into the ground.

Doesn't Any Given Saturday already have a stud deal? They bought shares in his dad too. Maybe we could see AGS and LR go at it in Dubai if they opt to keep him going. I wonder what's going on with Curlin--does he not have a deal due to his owner-situation craziness? It's either that or they're playing hard to get. It would be nice to see him too but I'll wait for the announcement.

Nobody's brought up Rags to Riches who I figure would've been retired already if they were going to. I think they've had more than enough opportunities. I realize they'd probably send Rags to Riches to Storm Cat or something but maybe they could consider Smart Strike (I just hope $75,000 isn't under breeding in their minds, I think the pedigree holds up). Pulls in Mr. Prospector and Curlin has that over Deputy Minister who's Rags' BM. You'd get a similar family mix in addition to the Mr. P/AP Indy that works out so well so often. That's another reason I think they'll try to bring her back, Storm Cat's no spring chicken so if they wanted to go that route they'd be trying to do that now. His book's already going down.

Don't you think they will send Rags to GC for free?

[SniperSB23]

Curlin winning was probably worst case for 3yos returning next year. Street Sense and Hard Spun were already gone so it wouldn't have mattered if they won. By Curlin winning they are now considering retiring him which likely wouldn't have been the case had he lost.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Danzig

open wound means infection, don't forget that barbaro suffered from a massive infection, and he did not have an open wound when he broke down.
also, because of the dislocation, the blood supply was cut off. that is the worst thing that can happen, as there is no chance once the supply is gone.

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

If what was said was true there is no chance of recovery...multiple fractures to sesamoids and conjular to cannon with open wound.

I stand corrected then, it was most definitely dislocated. I hope ESPN did their best to avoid showing it, it was very ugly.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

While agree that it would be nice if horses raced longer the idea that the game will somehow be revived if a few of the big horses run at 3 is just not true.
1st problem - The greater the chance of a popular horse having an untimely ending which does far more to hurt the game than one staying in training and running does to help it. Making anything mandatory will always make people make questionable decisions especially when so much money is involved. The truth is that I am sure that you can get a much lower insurance rate if a horse is not in training and some may retire and sit the year out anyway. Or run in the Dubai race then retire.

Good point about the risk of the untimely ending, but I don't agree with your conclusion. Anguish is part of the game. The Barbaro saga did nothing to hurt horseracing. Horseracing got more good press that year than any year in the past 20.

You may be right about some owners sitting out rather than paying higher insurance, but I'm skeptical of that.

2nd Problem - Racing fans are going to watch the big events regardless. New fans may not know who the hell is running anyway. Beside a few big days a year, it is not like the horses will run much anyway. Racings problem is that it needs new fans that bet, not just new fans.

I'd certainly agree that keeping horses in training isn't going to single-handedly solve all the problems. But I do think a fan base is important, and it's not easy to have a fan base in a sport where the stars disappear as soon as they become familiar.

3rd Problem - See recent campaigns of Funny Cide

Didn't Funny Cide bring fans and attention to Finger Lakes when he ran his swan song race? Of course it would have helped if Funny Cide had raced at his earlier level a la Kelso or John Henry. But even with his diminished talent, he was a popular draw.

Anyway, as always I appreciate and respect your thoughts.

--Dunbar